Access email, the web and corporate networks on one of the fastest networks available in the U.S., Or relax and play your favorite music and videos right on your device. With these easy-to-use productivity devices in hand, you can stay connected3 on your terms.

Just looking at the opening web page for each device demonstrates the difference quite clearly.

Perhaps you've convinced yourself that the devices are direct comparison in the Enterprise space, but clearly they're not.

Thanks for playing though.

And again, as I already mentioned, this does not mean that the devices cannot be compared against each other, but any comparison should consider that they are targeted at different markets.

Just slloooowwww even on what I would consider a fairly fast machine. I'm going to turn off all the bells and whistles very soon, I hope that helps. I just also don't think the same as Windows developers I guess. For a home machine I think Macs are much easier to deal with, and the integration of all the iApps is really nice. Just I let specs convince me Windows was a better value but I should have known better. The HP hardware is nice though.

The WSJ wrote the article. Not Apple. Rather than taking snippets out of the article and presenting them out of context to attempt to support your argument, I'd suggest reading the article in its entirety and making some effort to understand it. The gist of the article is quite clearly that there is a CONSUMER expectation to bring the iPhone into to Enterprise space. Not that APPLE are clearly planning to invade the space and are solidifying their plans as we speak.

Sorry - my interpretation for sure. In my hands it would be a toy. I'm sure many purchasers will feel this is the most serious business device they've ever held...and the $600 price tag will be their proof! :evil: Like the PSP!

I guess it detracts from the technological breakthroughs of the device. Also, I don't think you'll find one at your local Toys'R'Us or KayBee Toys

What breakthrough? The sensor thing is nice, but the visual voicemail is already on the market via CallWave for the desktop, and I know Avaya is set to offer it on nearly any handset (via carriers). Apple is evolving already existing functionality from other devices, there is nothing revolutionary except the marketing. I'm saying this as a prospective customer, so I have no axe to grind. It just seems to be a more elegant but not really more functional phone. In many areas it is actually less functional so it is hard to give it that 'revolutionary' tag. It is no Fidel Castro.

Perhaps you've convinced yourself that the devices are direct comparison in the Enterprise space, but clearly they're not.

Thanks for playing though

Even when faced with irrefutable proof, you remain steadfastly in kool-aid drinking mode. Are you yet-another-06/07 registrant sent to add to the Apple buzz machine? Why doesn't this crowd just share a common user name like: AAPLApologist0607?

Way to go ignoring the quote in the WSJ from Apple saying they are going after that market. Just ignore those other comparisons, convenient.

You really are full of yourself and are clearly overcompensating.

Don't be such a hypocrite. One of us read the entire article and was able to understand the message of the article. One of us decided to start with personal insults.

Go back and read even the small excerpt of what you quoted.
Read these words:

According to a person close to Apple

So we're taking an article from a third party, which quotes an unnamed source who very possibly doesn't even work for Apple. And we're basing out interpretation of Apple's marketing strategy on that, as opposed looking at the ACTUAL marketing that is happening in front of our eyes, in the public domain. Or even the rest of the article.

Even when faced with irrefutable proof, you remain steadfastly in kool-aid drinking mode. Are you yet-another-06/07 registrant sent to add to the Apple buzz machine? Why doesn't this crowd just share a common user name like: AAPLApologist0607?

And we're basing out interpretation of Apple's marketing strategy on that, as opposed looking at the ACTUAL marketing that is happening in front of our eyes, in the public domain. Or even the rest of the article.

Navigate your way to this Apple URL and scroll to the bottom. iPhone compared to (drum roll) business enterprise devices. Apple (the host of th web page) is directly comparing the iPhone (their non-business device by your description) to four other classes of "business" phones (Nokia, WM Smartphone, Blackberry, Palm Treo). Get it?

Of course, they very carefully limit the features in the comparison to entertainment capabilities. Lame.

Navigate your way to this Apple URL and scroll to the bottom. iPhone compared to (drum roll) business enterprise devices. Apple (the host of th web page) is directly comparing the iPhone (their non-business device by your description) to four other classes of "business" phones (Nokia, WM Smartphone, Blackberry, Palm Treo). Get it?

Of course, they very carefully limit the features in the comparison to entertainment capabilities. Lame.

That's my point.

Look at the Treo for example. In the Enterprise space it's a fantastic device. It supports full Outlook integration (well, almost). It supports Push email. It has great application support. These are things that are important to the Enterprise space.

It's also a usable device in the consumer space too, the two are not mutually exclusive, but the two markets are different. How many people who use the phone as an exclusively consumer device use Excel?

The Treo is a device that crosses over to both markets (and does it pretty well) and Palm's marketing reflects that.

So to better align with "you point" shouldn't Apple compare the iPhone's entertainment features to the LG Chocolate, Sidekick, or the Motorola iTunes capable Razor? Shouldn't they perceive these phones (and others like them) as their competition? Or are you giving Apple a pass - allowing them to selectively compare orthogonally related features to devices with different purposes in order to pad their limited capabilities and hide their real weaknesses? That's seems about as honest as claiming iPhone is the first phone with internet capability. Oh wait - that could be interpreted as something different - not. :shake:

So to better align with "you point" shouldn't Apple compare the iPhone's entertainment features to the LG Chocolate, Sidekick, or the Motorola iTunes capable Razor? Shouldn't they perceive these phones (and others like them) as their competition? Or are you giving Apple a pass - allowing them to selectively compare orthogonally related features to devices with different purposes in order to pad their limited capabilities and hide their real weaknesses? That's seems about as honest as claiming iPhone is the first phone with internet capability. Oh wait - that could be interpreted as something different - not. :shake:

I suspect that the reason that they haven't, is because the iPhone is a significant superset of the RAZR type devices. So yeah, I was somewhat surprised that they didn't, but I can understand why. It's considerably more expensive than those kinds of devices, but with a much larger feature set so to target those devices as comparison would not be as favourable as doing a comparison to the WM devices, despite the lack of "business" features. And this is represented in the lack of business marketing that we see for the iPhone.

Marketing is not about black and white honesty, it's about selling products. When did we see Microsoft advertise XP by saying "it'll only crash once a week."

If the iPhone bombs, perhaps one of the significant factors might be the "jack of all trades" type approach that is clearly confusing (a segment of) the market.